Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2014 Porto, Portugal, 30 June - 2 July 2014
A. Cunha, E. Caetano, P. Ribeiro, G. Müller (eds.) ISSN: 2311-9020; ISBN: 978-972-752-165-4
3611
ABSTRACT: One of the important design drivers for offshore wind turbine (OWT) structures is the fatigue life. In order for such structures to make worthwhile investments, they need to be in operation for 20-30 years after installation. The wind turbine and the foundation are subject to fatigue damage from environmental loading (wind, waves) as well as from cyclic loading imposed through the rotational frequency (1P) through mass and aerodynamic imbalances and from the blade passing frequency (3P) of the wind turbine. Through dynamic amplification and resonance, the fatigue damage suffered by the structure can severely increase if the natural frequency of the wind turbine gets close to the frequency of excitation, thereby reducing the service lifetime of the OWT. Therefore, predicting the first natural frequency is of paramount importance. In this paper a mechanical and mathematical model is presented, which provides a good initial estimate of the natural frequency of OWTs for conceptual design. The soil-structure interaction (SSI) is modelled through a set of springs, which also includes the cross-coupling between the lateral and rotational stiffness of the foundation. Approximate analytical formulae are given to approximate the natural frequency. The results are compared to measured data as well as results from similar software. The sensitivity of the natural frequency of the structure to the stiffness parameters of the foundation are analysed and discussed.
KEY WORDS: Offshore wind turbine; Euler-Bernoulli beam theory; Soil-structure interaction; Natural frequency; Cross stiffness; Sensitivity analysis.
1 INTRODUCTION Offshore wind farms (OWF) are expected to become significant contributors to electricity production in the future in Europe and worldwide. To make them a cost-effective alternative to fossil fuel power plants, offshore wind turbines (OWTs) are usually designed to be operational for at least 20-30 years. OWTs are subjected to intensive dynamic loading in a wide frequency band during their lifetime. The main dynamic loads are the environmental loading from wind turbulence and wave loading, and mechanical loading from aerodynamic- and mass imbalance of the rotating rotor (1P frequency band) and blade passage (3P frequency band) in front of the tower. The structures need to survive a large number of load cycles and therefore fatigue damage is an important design driver in OWT technology.
Offshore wind turbines are slender columns with a heavy mass on top: they are dynamically sensitive structures [1]–[3]. Therefore, it is essential that the structure is designed such that its natural frequency is reasonably far from the frequency bands of the excitations in order to minimise fatigue damage and achieve a long service lifetime. Further details on the loading and the frequency bands associated with the loadings can be found in [1]. Designing the support structure and foundation to fit these criteria is a challenging task. It requires the estimation of the stiffness of the foundation, which involves soil-structure interaction (SSI), a source of uncertainty. Furthermore, there are also dynamic issues related to the soil stiffness properties, which may change over time due to cyclic/dynamic excitation, as was demonstrated in [4]–[6]
Change in the natural frequency of an OWT over time was reported in [7]. Measured natural frequencies at the Walney site were reported to be 6-7% higher than the design value [8]. Depending on the natural frequency of the wind turbine structure, three forms of design are adopted: soft-soft, soft-stiff and stiff-stiff. Among these, soft-stiff is the current preferred design option whereby the natural frequency is designed to be within 1P (rotational frequency) and 3P (blade passing frequency). It is to be noted here that neither underestimation nor overestimation of the natural frequency of the OWT is conservative, as the fatigue damage may increase due to dynamic amplification with frequency change in any direction. Some cases of fatigue type failure of OWTs (specifically failure of the grouted connection between the tower and the transition piece) have also been reported [9]. A posteriori changes in an offshore environment are very expensive, however, and are to be avoided.
In this paper an attempt is made to provide a simple and quick method to estimate the first natural frequency of an OWT for the conceptual design phase in order to provide a means for incorporating fatigue in the early stages of design. In this formulation only basic information about the particular wind turbine and site is required. Furthermore, analytical formulae are provided to analyse sensitivity of the natural frequency to changing soil parameters.
2 MODEL OF THE OWT CONSIDERING SSI INCLUDING CROSS-COUPLING TERM
A typical offshore wind turbine supported on a monopile foundation is shown in Figure 1. The main structural elements of an OWT are the rotor, nacelle, tower, substructure and
Dynamic soil-structure interaction issues of offshore wind turbines
Laszlo Arany1, Subhamoy Bhattacharya2, S. J. Hogan3, John Macdonald4
1Department of Engineering Mathematics, University of Bristol, Office 1.80 Queens Building, University Walk Clifton BS8 1TR, PH (+44) 7423 690 220, e-mail: [email protected]
2Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Surrey, Guildford GU27 XH, UK 3Department of Engineering Mathematics, University of Bristol, Office 2.26, Merchant Venturers’ Building, University Walk
Clifton BS8 1TR, PH (+44) (0) 117 331 5606, e-mail: [email protected] 4Department of Civil Engineering, University of Bristol, Office 2.36 Queens Building, University Walk Clifton BS8 1TR,
(+44) (0) 117 331 5735
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2014
3612
foundation. The slender columns are typically connected to the substructure via a transition piece (TP). The most common foundations are monopiles, gravity base and jacket structures [10], although floating turbines are also being tested. In this paper a simplified mechanical model is used, whereby the rotor-nacelle assembly is modelled as a top head mass with rotational inertia, the tower is modelled as an Euler-Bernoulli beam, and the foundation stiffness is modelled by three springs (lateral-, rotational- and cross springs).
Figure 1. Model of the offshore wind turbine.
For simplicity, several parameters are introduced in Table 1 (for derivation see see [1]). The three springs model of the foundation stiffness is described by Equation 1.
(1)
where , and are the lateral, rotational and cross stiffness, respectively, and are the displacement and slope at the foundation, respectively, and and are the reactions (see Figure 1 for coordinates). In absence of more detailed information and formulae, we used Eurocode 8 Part 5 [11] Some methods for obtaining the soil stiffness parameters are given in [1].
The tower of length is modelled as an Euler-Bernoulli beam, using the mass per length , equivalent bending stiffness . Equivalent bending stiffness needs to be calculated because the tower is tapered. The calculations are
omitted here and only the final results are given; details can be found in detail in [1], [2], [12]. The equivalent bending stiffness for the calculation of the non-dimensional axial force is given in Equation 2-4. · (2) (3)
1 1 (4)
where and are the bottom and top diameters of the tower, respectively, is the area moment of inertia of the tower cross section at the bottom.
The equivalent stiffness for the non-dimensional stiffness parameters is given in Equation 5-6.
· (5)
(6)
where is the bending stiffness at the top. The rotor-nacelle assembly is modelled as a lumped mass on
the top of the tower , with mass moment of inertia (or rotational inertia) . Due to gravity, this mass also exerts an axial force along the tower .
Table 1. Parameters of natural frequency calculation.
Dimensionless group Formula
Non-dimensional lateral stiffness
Non-dimensional rotational stiffness
Non-dimensional cross stiffness
Non-dimensional axial force
Mass ratio (top head mass / tower mass)
Non-dimensional rotary inertia
Frequency scaling parameter
Non-dimensional rotational frequency ( is the rotational frequency)
Ω
The Euler-Bernoulli beam equation with compressive axial
force and without excitation is written in Equation 7.
, ,
, 0 (7)
where is the displacement in the direction, is time, is the equivalent bending stiffness of the tower, is the
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2014
3613
mass per length of the tower, is the axial force (see Figure 1).
Assuming constant , and , using the parameters introduced in Table 1, separating variables with ,
and using the non-dimensional coordinate / , the Euler-Bernoulli beam equation can be simplified
to the form given in Equation 8
Ω 0 (8)
Looking for a solution in the form the following characteristic equation can be written:
Ω 0 (9)
Replacing with we get the following:
Ω 0 (10)
,Ω
Ω , Ω (11)
The solution can be written in the following form:
cos sin cosh
sinh (12)
with
| | and | | (13)
Using vector notation: cos sin cosh sinh
PP
The boundary conditions are also formulated with the non-dimensional parameters introduced in Table 1. The derivations are given in [1] in detail.
I. The sum of shear forces at the bottom is zero: 0 0 0 0 (14)
II. The sum of bending moments at the bottom is zero: 0, 0, 0, 0 (15)
III. The sum of shear forces at the top is zero: 1 1 Ω 1 0 (16)
IV. The sum of bending moments at the top is zero: 1 Ω 1 0 (17)
Substituting the solution for given in Equation 12 into the boundary conditions and looking for non-trivial solutions, one obtains the matrix shown in Equation 18.
sinh αΩ cosh cosh αΩ sinhcosh Ω sinh sinh Ω cosh
(18)
The determinant of this matrix is set to zero to find the natural frequency.
det 0 (19)
This determinant produces a non-linear transcendental equation, which has to be solved numerically.
3 APPROXIMATE FORMULAE In order to study the dependency of the natural frequency on the foundation stiffness parameters, analytical approximations are formulated to fit the solutions calculated by numerically solving the transcendental equation given in Equation 19. The natural frequency is expressed in terms of the six main parameters , , , , , as defined in Table 1 (see Equation 20.)
, , , , , (20)
First the fixed base value of the natural frequency is calculated, which is the natural frequency on a perfectly stiff foundation with ∞, ∞, 0. For this calculation some initial values of the axial force, mass ratio and rotational inertia parameters are selected: , , . Using these values the fixed base natural frequency is expressed as:
∞, ∞, 0, , , (21)
This fixed base frequency is practically calculated for a vertical cantilever beam carrying an end mass. This frequency can be calculated by standard formulae for uniform beams [13]:
and (22)
where is the mass of the rotor-nacelle assembly, is the mass of the tower, is the stiffness of the 1 degree of freedom system, is the length of the tower and is the equivalent bending stiffness of the tower. More accurate estimate of the natural frequency may be obtained by using the equivalent stiffness and equivalent mass formulae given in [3].
The dependency of the natural frequency on the parameters are determined by separation of variables. The flexible foundation is taken into account by the coefficients and as given in Equation 23.
· (23)
Once the fixed base natural frequency is available, these coefficients are calculated to incorporate the effects of a flexible foundation, using the three springs model shown in Equation 1. The two coefficients and represent the rotational and lateral stiffness dependency, respectively. Both coefficients are, however, dependent on all three variables, as shown in Equation 24.
, , , , . (24)
The expressions given in Equation 25 and 26 were found to approximate the numerically calculated curves well.
Proc
3614
ThcapFigulatewithnatuzeropoinlatestabavo
Indete
ThturbSecfor Theconthe con
In thFi
andcroscalcWa
Figth
ceedings of the 9t
4
, ,
, ,
he conditionsture the effecures 2 and 3,
eral or rotatiohout cross couural frequencyo. The inclusint from 0 to
eral stiffness, rbility of the soided. n Equations 2ermined empir
hese values bine, the Siection 4). Howeother wind tu
e range of vnditions set in
errors increanstants may be
hese cases theigure 2 and 3
d , respectivss coupling cculated for thlney 1 site [14
gure 2. Numehe natural freq
th International C
1
1
s set in Equatt of the cross the natural fr
onal stiffnessupling (short y tends to zerion of the cro/ and
respectively. Isystem is not
25 and 26 trically as
0.6,
were calculatemens SWT-ever, they pro
urbines as welvalidity of Equations 25
ase. A practice given as
1.2 and
e error is belowshow the acc
vely. It also case and showe Siemens SW4] (see wind tu
rically calculaquency as a fu
rotationa
Conference on Stru
;
;
tion 25 and 2coupling stif
requency apprs value decredashed lines
ro as the stiffnoss coupling te
/ for theIn these low stguaranteed a
the coefficien
0.5
ted using on-3.6-107 (seeoved to be rell (see case stu
and is cand 26; close
cal rule for t
1.5
w 1%. curacy of appincludes the
ws typical valWT-3.6-107 wurbine “D” in
ated and approunction of the nal stiffness.
uctural Dynamics
6 are necessaffness. Referriroaches zero aeases. In the in Figure 2-3
ness values teerm shifte rotational antiffness region
and thus it is
nts and
ne particular e turbine “Deasonably accudies in Sectionstrained by
e to the limit vthe validity o
proximation focurves for th
lues of anwind turbine a
Section 4.)
oximated curvnon-dimensio
s, EURODYN 20
(25)
(26)
ary to ing to as the
case .) the
end to ts this nd the ns the to be
are
(27)
wind D” in curate ion 4) y the
values of the
(28)
for he no nd at the
ve of onal
4The availaccu
The
A: Lw
B: Ntu
C: Irw
D: Windu
Figthe
Thare inertThe stiffnformlimit
Para
014
NATURAL Fnatural frequ
lable in the uracy of the an
following fou
Lely A2 NedWwind turbine (NNorth Hoyle, Vurbine (UK) rene Vorrink,
wind turbine (NWalney 1, Sstrial wind tur
ure 3. Numerie natural frequ
he calculated presented in
tia was takecalculations a
ness parametmulae taken frtations.
Table 2. Da
ameter A
26
38
-1
0.0
1.0
3.1
FREQUENCYuency of sevliterature wa
nalytical formu
ur OWTs are u
Wind 40/500 2Netherlands) Vestas V66 3
, NordTank NNetherlands) Siemens SWrbine (UK)
ically calculatuency as a fun
lateral st
non-dimension Table 2 (then as zero in and data are ters , arom Eurocod
ata of several
A B
698 117
8.88 28
174 -6
033 0.0
018 0.7
130 1.3
Y RESULTS veral wind tuas determinedulation given
used:
2 bladed 500kW
3 bladed 2MW
NTK 600/43
WT-3.6-107 3
ted and approxnction of the ntiffness.
onal parametehe non-dimen
all cases duefound in [1], and are e 8 [11] keep
Offshore Win
B C
775 588
8 39.
63 -28
11 0.03
60 1.14
23 2.03
urbines with d to address in Section 2.
W study purp
W industrial w
3 bladed 600
bladed 3.6M
ximated curvenon-dimension
ers of the OWnsional rotatie to lack of d[3], [6]. The taken based
ping in mind
nd Turbines
C D
80 776
64 77.4
84 -511
30 0.04
44 0.9
35 1.34
data the
poses
wind
0kW
MW
e of nal
WTs ional data).
soil d on d the
63
49
1.7
43
9
454
ThBersoftgiveprov
ThIt isabohighvaludev
Mea
Cal
Erro
App
5 Thebasethe Usinrespslopvariappwas
Thandthesthe alsoconexpusedEquexp
Suthe Equ
Thnon
whe
Thcan
he natural frnoulli beam tware using ten by the sovided by the fhe accuracy os important to
out the offshorh uncertainty ues. Also, as
viate from its iTa
asured
culated
or %
proximation
METHODOe method of ed on determdependence ong these apprpect to each vpe of the taniable, giving
proximate forms developed inhe soil stiffne
d can also chse parametersdependence o
o investigatednceptual desipressed in termd to determinuation 21). Upressed as
ubstituting thecoefficients
uation 29 is eqhe following
n-dimensional
ere is the n
he expressiontilever column
frequency retheory a
the methodolftware are coformulae of Seof results is aco note that there wind turbiin parameterit was mentio
initial value wable 3. Natural
A.
0.634
0.718
11.7%
0.721
OLOGY FOR sensitivity an
mining approxiof the natural froximate formvariable can bengential line
a good indmula to incorn Section 3. ess parametershange over tims is the most on the other td in this secgn. In thesms of the inine the fixed bsing these va
e initial values, , , the
quivalent to Eqexpression fiaxial force:
non-dimension
n for the criticn is given by
esults compuare calculatedlogy of Sectompared to thection 3 in Tacceptable for pe analysis requine or the sites especially inoned before, t
with time as wel frequency re
B.
N/A
0.345
% N/A
0.344
SENSITIVITnalysis adopteimate analyticfrequency on
mulae the partie calculated, w
at the initiadicator of therporate the st
s are subject tme, therefore important to three main paction as it me cases theitial values base natural falues the nat
·
s , , intey are all unitquation 24. ts the results
nal axial force
cal force a uni[13]
Pr
uted using Ed by the aution 2. The rehe approxima
able 3. preliminary deuires minimale, and that then the soil stifthe frequencyell [4]–[6]. sults
C. D
0.546 0.
0.456 0.3
16.4% 5.4
0.454 0.3
TY ANALYSIed in this papcal expressiondifferent variaial derivativeswhich describal point for e sensitivity. tiffness param
to high uncertthe sensitivi
analyse. Howarameters ,may be usefu
coefficients, , that
frequency tural frequen
to the formulaty and in that
well for chan
e at buckling
iform cross se
roceedings of the
Euler-thors’ esults ations
esign. l data ere is ffness y may
D.
.35
331
4%
332
S per is ns for ables. s with be the
each The
meters
tainty ity of
wever, , is
ul for s are were (see cy is
(29)
ae for t case
nging
(30)
(31)
ection
(32)
Hointo founwill apprEquaappr
whernumFiguand 3
Figuthe
Ththe c
The numshow
Fig
9th International
owever, necesaccount the ta
ndation [1], [3be very far
roximating thation 32 is rearoximated by t
re is detemerically calcuure 4, as well a33.
ure 4. Numerie natural frequ
he dependencecoefficient .
constant ismerically calcuwn in Figure 5
ure 5. Numerithe natural fr
l Conference on S
ssary adjustmeapered shape
3], [6]. It musr from buckhe critical asonably accuthe following
ermined emplated and appras the simplif
ically calculateuency as a fun
axial f
e on the mass.
s determined ulated and t
5, the good fit
ically calculatrequency as a
Structural Dynam
ents needs toof the colum
st be added thking at all tload with
urate. Equally,linear relation
pirically as roximation cufied expression
ed and approxnction of the nforce.
s ratio is ap
empirically tthe approximis apparent.
ted and approxfunction of th
mics, EURODYN
be made to mn and the flexhat a wind turtimes. Therefthe formula, the curve canship
(
0.075. urves are showns of Equatio
ximated curvenon-dimension
pproximated
(
to be 4. mated curves
ximated curvehe mass ratio
2014
3615
take xible rbine fore,
a of an be
(33)
The wn in on 32
es of nal
with
(34)
The are
e of
Proc
3616
Fiiner
Thefoun
Figth
Th
the Equ30, detethe Tab
The0.9,
6 Havnatu,
thesthisgiveusedeachparaEqucon
6.1 For be w
ceedings of the 9t
6
inally, the dertia is expresse
e parameter d nd to be 2
gure 6. Numehe natural freq
he natural freqfixed base na
uation 29 with34, 35. The c
ermined empiSiemens SW
ble 2). The val
0.6,
e initial value, 0. The 2.36.
SENSITIVIving obtainedural frequenc, , , ,
se parameterss approximate es the slope od to characterh parameter. ameter is deteuation 24 thatnstant.
Non-dimer the partial dwritten with
th International C
ependence on ed with .
is determine2.2. The curve
rically calculaquency as a fu
rotation
quency can noatural frequenh the coefficiconstants ,irically. In thi
WT-3.6-107 wilues are given
0.5, 4,
s for this winnon-dimensi
ITY ANALYSd an approximcy as a fun
, the sensitivs can be analy
expression wof the curves arise the sensitiThe partial dermined by ast do not con
ensional rotatierivative with
, ,
Conference on Stru
the non-dime
d empiricallyes are compar
ated and approunction of the nnal inertia.
ow be expressncy and the sixents given in, , , in thes work they wind turbine (d
n in Equation 2
2.2,
nd turbine areional axial fo
SIS mate analyticanction of thvity of the naysed. The par
with respect to at the initial pivity of the na
derivative of ssuming that ntain the giv
ional stiffness h respect to .
uctural Dynamics
ensional rotat
y and its valuered in Figure 6
oximated curvnon-dimensio
sed as a functix parameters Equations 25e coefficients were calculatedenoted by “D24.
0.075
e 0.043,orce at buckli
al formula fohe six paramatural frequenrtial derivativdifferent vari
point. This sloatural frequen with respectthe coefficien
ven paramete
Equation 29
s, EURODYN 20
tional
(35)
e was 6.
ve of onal
ion of using 5, 26, were
ed for D” in
(36)
ing is
or the meters ncy to ves of iables ope is ncy to t to a nts in r are
9 can
With
6.2Usinsimil
6.3The p
6.4The
then
Othethe s
6.5The
and t
6.6The
and t
Tabgivenmarktablecorrethat
014
1
h this the parti
Non-dimenng Equation 3larly:
C
Non-dimenpartial derivativ
·
Non-dimenpartial derivat
erwise, using slope is simply
Mass ratiopartial derivat
the result is
Non-dimenpartial derivat
the result is
ble 4 shows thn in Table 2, tked values in Fe refers to thesponding to for a unit c
ial derivative c
nsional lateral7 as a basis,
nsional cross sve with respect
nsional axial ftive can be wr
, ,
the simple liny .
tive is written
, ,
nsional rotatiotive is written
, ,
he partial derithat is, the sloFigures 2-6. A
he Lely A2 5 contains th
change in
1
can be written
l stiffness the partial d
stiffness to can be e
force ritten using
, ,
·
near expressio
n using
, ,
· 1
onal inertia n using
, ,
· 1
ivatives at theope of the tangAs an example00kW wind
he value 0.002 (±1), the n
(
n as:
(
erivative is g
(
expressed as:
(
(
on of Equation
(
(
(
e parameter vagential lines ae, column A inturbine. The 257, which mnatural freque
(37)
(38)
given
(39)
(40)
(41)
(42)
n 33,
(43)
(44)
(45)
(46)
alues at the n the row
means ency
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 2014
3617
increases by 0.00257Hz. Similarly, the row corresponding to for example the mass ratio contains the negative value of -0.285, which corresponds to decreasing natural frequency with increasing mass ratio. Clearly, the slopes are meaningful only for small variations in the parameters, for significant changes the graphs in Figures 2-6 are to be used. According to Kühn [7], the soil stiffness parameters had an uncertainty of -20% to +40% in the case of the Lely A2 wind farm.
Table 4. Sensitivity of the natural frequency for parameters.
Sensitivity of OWT
Parameter A B C D
8.32E-06 5.08E-06 6.79E-08 3.49E-06
2.57E-03 2.97E-03 2.37E-03 1.14E-03
1.23E-04 1.03E-04 1.01E-05 5.21E-05
-1.59E-01 -9.88E-02 -7.52E-02 -7.17E-02
-2.85E-01 -1.60E-01 -1.70E-01 -1.45E-01
-7.95E-01 -4.91E-01 -3.79E-01 -3.66E-01
It is important to note it is more meaningful to incorporate
the orders of magnitude of the parameters in order to compare the sensitivity. For example, one can look at the change in the natural frequency if the parameters change by 1%. Table 5 shows the result of this analysis for the soil stiffness parameters.
Table 5. Frequency change with 1% parameter change.
Sensitivity of OWT
Parameter A B C D
0.00022 0.00030 0.00001 0.00027
0.00100 0.00118 0.00066 0.00089
-0.00021 -0.00029 -0.00001 -0.00027
It is clear from Table 5 that the natural frequency is most sensitive to the rotational stiffness, and therefore overturning moment resistance is the most important task. The lateral and cross stiffness parameters show equal sensitivity, but both are generally an order of magnitude smaller than the rotational stiffness.
7 CONCLUSION In this paper a methodology was presented for calculating the natural frequency of an offshore wind turbine structure on flexible foundation using the Euler-Bernoulli beam theory and a three spring model to take into account the flexible foundation and soil-structure interaction. The analysis yielded a non-linear transcendental equation that needs to be solved numerically.
For preliminary design it is useful to formulate a simplified expression for the natural frequency, therefore analytical
formulae were derived to approximate the numerically calculated natural frequencies. The approximation curves incorporate the dependence of the natural frequency on the lateral, rotational and cross stiffness parameters, as well as the axial force in the column, the mass ratio of the rotor-nacelle assembly and the tower, and the rotational inertia of the rotor-nacelle assembly. The analytical formulae were found to approximate the numerically obtained results reasonably well.
The approximate formulae were also useful to analyse the sensitivity of the natural frequency to each parameter. It was shown that the parameters with likely changes and high uncertainty are the foundation stiffness parameters. Among these soil stiffness parameters the rotational stiffness ranks as the most important variable with the highest sensitivity.
REFERENCES [1] S. Adhikari and S. Bhattacharya, “Dynamic analysis of wind turbine
towers on flexible foundations,” Shock Vib., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 37–56, 2012.
[2] S. Bhattacharya, D. Lombardi, and D. Muir Wood, “Similitude relationships for physical modelling of monopile-supported offshore wind turbines,” Int. J. Phys. Model. Geotech., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 58–68, Jun. 2011.
[3] S. Adhikari and S. Bhattacharya, “Vibrations of wind-turbines considering soil-structure interaction,” Wind Struct., vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 85–112, 2011.
[4] D. Lombardi, S. Bhattacharya, and D. Muir Wood, “Dynamic soil–structure interaction of monopile supported wind turbines in cohesive soil,” Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., vol. 49, pp. 165–180, Jun. 2013.
[5] S. Bhattacharya, N. Nikitas, J. Garnsey, N. A. Alexander, J. Cox, D. Lombardi, D. Muir Wood, and D. F. T. Nash, “Observed dynamic soil–structure interaction in scale testing of offshore wind turbine foundations,” Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 2013.
[6] S. Bhattacharya and S. Adhikari, “Experimental validation of soil–structure interaction of offshore wind turbines,” Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., vol. 31, no. 5–6, pp. 805–816, May 2011.
[7] M. Kühn, “Soft or stiff: A fundamental question for designers of offshore wind energy converters,” in Proc. European Wind Energy Conference EWEC ’97, 1997.
[8] D. Kallehave and C. L. Thilsted, “Modification of the API p-y Formulation of Initial Stiffness of Sand,” in Offshore Site Investigation and Geotechnics: Integrated Geotechnologies - Present and Future, 2012.
[9] I. Lotsberg, “Structural mechanics for design of grouted connections in monopile wind turbine structures,” Mar. Struct., vol. 32, pp. 113–135, Jul. 2013.
[10] European Wind Energy Association, “The European offshore wind industry - key trends and statistics 2012,” 2013.
[11] European Committee for Standardization, “Eurocode 8: Design of Structures for earthquake resistance - Part 5: Foundations, retaining structures and geotechnical aspects,” 2003.
[12] S. Bhattacharya, “SDOWT: USER MANUAL (Simplified Dynamics of Wind Turbines),” Bristol, 2011.
[13] R. D. Blevins, Formulas for Natural Frequency and Mode Shape. Krieger Publishing Company, 1984.
[14] DONG Energy, “Walney Offshore Wind Farm - Facts of the project,” 2013. [Online]. Available: http://www.dongenergy.com/walney/about_walney/about_the_project/pages/facts.aspx. [Accessed: 06-May-2013].
Top Related